I don't doubt the looks would equal the exact setup I have entered, but the QB checking down away from the gameplan is the issue. If my gameplan is go deep 40% of the time and my formations have only my # 1 wr deep and he only gets 50 yards a game for 10 yards a catch, something isn't adding up. Again, I had no issues in Beta getting the ball to my WRs where I told them to go (in Beta the QB would throw into triple coverage without fear lol). I don't think it is a gameplanning issue. SIngle coverage can now get my QB to look away from the intended target. Not always, but often enough it seems something has changed without any explanation or notice.

Posted by kevintam90 on 11/24/2013 11:45:00 PM (view original):Does anyone else have their game plan heavily involving the RB in the passing game?

I changed my gameplan to 5% very short, 5% short . and set my RB routes in formations to 0's across the board for Medium, long and deep. Yet somewhow every game my RB is still the most heavily targeted players.

This post doesn't make any sense. You can't set percentages in game plans. I think you are confusing game plans, play books and formations. My guess is that the engine is targeting your running backs just as you have it entered. The issue lies with the fact that you don't know what you are doing.

I'm not defending that point, but if this engine allows us to throw to what ever position 200-300 times a season than your choice as a coach. Coaches can throw to WRs or TEs 200-300 times a season if you want too. Or, your QB can rush rush every down. Again, we can debate all day whether rushing your WR every play makes sense. That is not the issue. We can be as goofy with your coaching choice as you want. Granted the default VS and S passing seem to be throwing a lot to RB, but if the default setting had QBs rushing every play, we would be talking about that now rather than short passes to the WR.

Bob, so in all of your formations in "No RB Passes" your RBs are either blocking or set to all zeros? Just to be clear, in the formations where your RBs are not blocking, do you have other positions allocated to VS, S, M, L & D? Just in case if all positions are set to zero, i dont know where the engine will throw the ball

The playbook uses a single formation - Pro Set. The Fullback is set to Block. TE is set to go out for pass. VS distribution is WR1 50%, WR2 50%. Short and Medium are set to TE 100%, all other positions 0. Long and Deep are both set to WR1 50%, WR2 50%.

The Playbook is set to use only the one position. 100% pass (only because it's an exhibition game next). On all downs and distances, pass distribution is 20% to each zone.

Posted by kevintam90 on 11/24/2013 11:45:00 PM (view original):Does anyone else have their game plan heavily involving the RB in the passing game?

I changed my gameplan to 5% very short, 5% short . and set my RB routes in formations to 0's across the board for Medium, long and deep. Yet somewhow every game my RB is still the most heavily targeted players.

This post doesn't make any sense. You can't set percentages in game plans. I think you are confusing game plans, play books and formations. My guess is that the engine is targeting your running backs just as you have it entered. The issue lies with the fact that you don't know what you are doing.

by gameplan I meant playbook, not the tab "game plan". my GAME PLAN is to not throw short/very short a lot. so I set those low. But of course the QB still checks down. In the formation tab I set ONLY my WRs to go Med/ long/deep. I know what i am doing, 3.0 isnt that difficult to understand. The issue is the engine does not run what I put in.

But, I did just set my RBs to zero across the board. and he did not catch a pass all game.

Posted by noah23 on 11/26/2013 8:48:00 PM (view original):But if it equals what you set up.... then how is the QB checking down away from the gameplan. That doesn't add up to me.

I don't know how else to explain it. I don't think targets are equaling what I set up. If the QB looks away from intended targets, the stats won't be divided the way the coach intends. If the running back is set up to recieve all short and very short passes, and the Qb is set up to only look at both 10% of the time, and the # 1 WR is setup to recieve 75-100% of long - deep passes, and the QB is setup to look there 60% of the time, and the running back still gets more receptions than the WR, is there an issue?

Maybe the coverage was excellent causing checkdowns. Or maybe the deep coverage is overpowered. Without input from Oriole it is hard to know. If this doesn't make sense, I don't know how else to explain what I was seeing during the season. I get that you didn't see it with your team, but I am not the only coach who experienced this.

Posted by noah23 on 11/26/2013 8:48:00 PM (view original):But if it equals what you set up.... then how is the QB checking down away from the gameplan. That doesn't add up to me.

I don't know how else to explain it. I don't think targets are equaling what I set up. If the QB looks away from intended targets, the stats won't be divided the way the coach intends. If the running back is set up to recieve all short and very short passes, and the Qb is set up to only look at both 10% of the time, and the # 1 WR is setup to recieve 75-100% of long - deep passes, and the QB is setup to look there 60% of the time, and the running back still gets more receptions than the WR, is there an issue?

Maybe the coverage was excellent causing checkdowns. Or maybe the deep coverage is overpowered. Without input from Oriole it is hard to know. If this doesn't make sense, I don't know how else to explain what I was seeing during the season. I get that you didn't see it with your team, but I am not the only coach who experienced this.

Right. Thats not really what you said. There are certainly some things that could be different. For one I have a top notch QB (1st team AA conference player of the year and top 5 rated QB in DIII) and I have two top notch WR (both in top 10) so they are going to get open. I'm doing some more research into this as we go. Just takes a lot longer and is a lot more complicated then it was in beta.

Posted by noah23 on 11/26/2013 8:48:00 PM (view original):But if it equals what you set up.... then how is the QB checking down away from the gameplan. That doesn't add up to me.

I don't know how else to explain it. I don't think targets are equaling what I set up. If the QB looks away from intended targets, the stats won't be divided the way the coach intends. If the running back is set up to recieve all short and very short passes, and the Qb is set up to only look at both 10% of the time, and the # 1 WR is setup to recieve 75-100% of long - deep passes, and the QB is setup to look there 60% of the time, and the running back still gets more receptions than the WR, is there an issue?

Maybe the coverage was excellent causing checkdowns. Or maybe the deep coverage is overpowered. Without input from Oriole it is hard to know. If this doesn't make sense, I don't know how else to explain what I was seeing during the season. I get that you didn't see it with your team, but I am not the only coach who experienced this.

Right. Thats not really what you said. There are certainly some things that could be different. For one I have a top notch QB (1st team AA conference player of the year and top 5 rated QB in DIII) and I have two top notch WR (both in top 10) so they are going to get open. I'm doing some more research into this as we go. Just takes a lot longer and is a lot more complicated then it was in beta.

My top 2 recievers were in the top 5 according to guess reports. My Qb was not the best as he was a redshirt sophomore, but was ranked well within his class (#1). I don't think a lack of talent was the issue, but who knows? Perhaps you are on to something. I guess we will see how this season goes! I will keep trying to go deep, but only as much as it does not cost me games. I will get stuck trying against inferior teams which doesn't prove much either way. I also will keep fiddling with the playbooks each game. I will keep you posted!